I completely agree. Westbrook is exactly what we need and we could turn the corner as a team with a player of his abilities. I like Augustin but there's no question that defense is our biggest weakness. In either case, we have to take a point guard without a doubt.

Taterhead

06-02-2008, 07:19 PM

I'm really torn on the idea of drafting Westbrook. He could be a steal or a complete dud.

1) He does not have the size to be a great defender at the 2 guard, IMO. While he will be able to bother some guys with his quickness, others will abuse him with thier strength advatage. Seems to me that if he is going to be worth the 11th pick, he has got to be able to play PG. He does intrigue me as a PG prospect, and could be a Rajon Rondo type lead guard. But I haven't seen him enough to feel comfortable with us taking him.

2) He has not played enough point guard to be able to tell if he can play it at the NBA level. PG is one position where there is a huge leap from NCAA to NBA. The draft camps and workouts will go along way to help make the determination, but it's still a complete guessing game.

3) If he can't play either position effectively, you cannot have him on the floor. Therefor, his defensive abilities are a complete waste. An example of this is Greg Buckner, who is a tenacious defender. But he does not have the size or skillset to play either position well enough to be a major contributor. And whatever team he is on can't play him down the stretch of important games because of his glaring weaknesses, when his defensive abilities are needed most.

I agree that if he can play the point effectively, he fills some glaring weaknesses we have very well. I hope he's there so we have the choice. But if he looks like he needs a lot of work to be able to play the point, I would rather us take Deandre Jordan and put the time in development into him.

Kegboy

06-02-2008, 07:20 PM

Wow. I think Westbrook can be a good player, but I certainly don't see him being a star. Not even close.

It's a sign of a bad draft when everyone is talking about trading down.

Anthem

06-02-2008, 07:32 PM

Hey, if he drops to 11 I'll be thrilled. Basically somebody has to drop. I just hope it's not Augustin.

BleedBlue

06-02-2008, 07:42 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6FP0ua5xFw4

Nothing else needs to be said :)

rexnom

06-02-2008, 07:43 PM

I see Westbrook, at worst, as finding his niche being a defensive stopper. Hopefully he develops some kind of consistent jumper and becomes a great perimeter player on offense as well.

purdue101

06-02-2008, 08:43 PM

westbrook has the physical abilities to be a legit all-star. few pg's in the league would have his size and athletic ability. the minute he's drafted, he's already an above average defender at the point position. he literally shut down guys like mayo and bayless all season long. all he needs to do is develop pg instincts and a jump shot. everything i have read says he is a gym rat, which tells me that that development is possible.

augustin is a nice player, but he's not a starting pg on a contending team. he's a rich man's jameer nelson. pg's like arenas, billups, williams, etc would eat him for lunch.

i'm willing to take the risk on westbrook. at worst he's a defensive stopper off the bench.

Anthem

06-02-2008, 10:28 PM

all he needs to do is develop pg instincts
No small feat.

Nobody's worried about his defense at the 1 spot, or even his ability to score on opposing PGs. We need more than that from a point man, though. You don't learn to run a team by working out in a gym.

Not saying he can't (and I'd be glad to draft him) but it's not a sure thing.

Shade

06-02-2008, 10:54 PM

Augustin at #6? Really?

And I still say we need to trade into a late first and nab Chalmers, even if we take Augustin/Westbrook at #11. In fact, especially if we take Westbrook, because he's more of a SG anyway.

TheSauceMaster

06-02-2008, 10:56 PM

I'd be fairly happy if we could get Westbrook.

croz24

06-02-2008, 11:33 PM

the pacers really need to try to steal that #13 from portland...foster for pryz + #13?

EDIT: or maybe some sort of deal involving jo and that #13 pick being the key...i'd be less inclined to want granger gone if we could somehow acquire a solid pick without giving him up...

MillerTime

06-02-2008, 11:54 PM

Lopez is slipping a lot. He was projected to go around 3 a few months ago. I hope he keeps dropping, I would rather have him than a PG

Young

06-03-2008, 12:34 AM

You know i'm not a fan of most of the bigs in this draft but if we take one we might as take that French big. Trade for a later pick maybe.

I never seen him play but there are just so many question marks surronding most these bigs this french big man sounds as good as any of em.

Naptown_Seth

06-03-2008, 12:44 AM

Hey, if he drops to 11 I'll be thrilled. Basically somebody has to drop. I just hope it's not Augustin.
Augustin at 11 is not a drop.

I've stuck up for Westbrook other than the non-PG thing, but at the same time I don't see it as a HR pick. I'd be far more thrilled with Love and his game smarts. It's just that I do see the athletic ability in Westbrook and think that part is legit.

However I think he might have the impact of an Augman perhaps, though it's Weaver who reminds me most of SA in terms of body type and playing style.

Not necessarily at 11, but the guys I most want to be Pacers after watching them play at least a couple of games, in order:
Love, Mayo, Rush, Chalmers, Arthur, Weaver, Lee, Westbrook, Walker

Rose and Beas I didn't even bother naming, and I almost left Mayo off too. EJ and Lopez I'd be fine with at 11 but I wouldn't trade up to go get them. There are some other potentially talented guys out there but most of them didn't grab me as someone I really want on the team (or don't want for that matter, more like meh).

Some guys on my list I like more specifically because I think the Pacers could get them with their 2nd pick or trading back into round 1/up from their 2nd pick.

Naptown_Seth

06-03-2008, 12:48 AM

You want highlights try this instead of 'brook dunking on a guy that should have had the charge taken.

Love, taking it out of the net on a make, 2 hand chest pass instant fastbreak. You don't need to run to be part of a running game...

yup, that's about how westbrook scored half of his baskets...only if love were a 7 footer. no question he'd be the #1 pick in the draft and would probably go down as an all-time great. 6'8 1/2" without shoes does scare me. again, if i HAD to chose between love, westbrook, and augustin at #11, i'd take love. if we came out of this draft with love, walker, and lawson, i'd be happy...

Naptown_Seth

06-03-2008, 01:07 AM

One more, Weaver pulls a Prince and runs down Westbrook. Weaver plays a little wing point and is a monster defender, and can be had in the late first or maybe even early 2nd. He's also got a really solid family situation and work ethic that puts him in line with Augustin somewhat. Wingspan is probably an issue, as is consistent offense, but he does give you a lot of what you want from Westbrook for a lot cheaper.

6'8 1/2" without shoes does scare me
As I keep saying, Love scores from below the shoulders already, he pushes off, steps away or just gets things up quick. This is why I compare him to McHale. Watch the YouTube of Love's output vs Oregon and compare to the McHale footage ESPN Classic is running for the BOS/LAL series.

It's very similar in a "he got stats doing it THAT way" style. He didn't use height or speed at UCLA to have success, so it doesn't bother me that he won't have those to lean on in the NBA either.

I actually worry more when I see the Westbrook leaner dunk on a guy almost taking a charge because at the next level I don't think he gets that play. However I think Westbrook is great in the loose ball/improv situations so I still like him.

croz24

06-03-2008, 01:27 AM

naptown - but do you really believe that style can translate to the nba? i'm not sure i can name you one successful big man with love's size, body type, and athleticism in the nba right now...he could be THE exception, but it'd definitely be a risk hoping he is.

i still don't understand the infatuation with westbrook. it seems those who watched him extensively at ucla, are a little down on him. those going by the scouting reports and camp results are obsessed with him.

Young

06-03-2008, 01:33 AM

i still don't understand the infatuation with westbrook. it seems those who watched him extensively at ucla, are a little down on him. those going by the scouting reports and camp results are obsessed with him.

I rate Westbrook highly for the Pacers.

He is big, athletic, capable of defending, hard worker, coachable, teamplayer, etc. He is a fairly safe pick. Compared to the bigs like McGee, Jordan they have some serious question marks. There is really no safe big man to take in this draft aside from Michael Beasley.

I'm not someone who is obsessed with Westbrook by any means. But I do like him as a prospect. I also don't expect him to be a top player. I always like to think of him to be similar to Antonio Daniels.

If Pacers want a home run type of pick they better move up to get Eric Gordon or look at DJ Augistin (better chance of being a star than Westbrook IMO) or look at maybe Donte Greene or one of the big guys.

Westbrook, IMO, is a safe pick.

BleedBlue

06-03-2008, 01:39 AM

I rate Westbrook highly for the Pacers.

He is big, athletic, capable of defending, hard worker, coachable, teamplayer, etc. He is a fairly safe pick. Compared to the bigs like McGee, Jordan they have some serious question marks. There is really no safe big man to take in this draft aside from Michael Beasley.

I'm not someone who is obsessed with Westbrook by any means. But I do like him as a prospect. I also don't expect him to be a top player. I always like to think of him to be similar to Antonio Daniels.

If Pacers want a home run type of pick they better move up to get Eric Gordon or look at DJ Augistin (better chance of being a star than Westbrook IMO) or look at maybe Donte Greene or one of the big guys.

Westbrook, IMO, is a safe pick.

If the Pacers take Donte Greene, I will beat the crap out of anyone and anything in sight. He is the most overrated player projected to go in the top 20. Terrible shot selection, bad attitude, not NBA ready at all. And I'm a Syracuse fan.

Anthem

06-03-2008, 01:49 AM

Lopez is slipping a lot. He was projected to go around 3 a few months ago. I hope he keeps dropping, I would rather have him than a PG
That would be great... not sure it will happen, but the dude is dropping. Not a flashy pick, but more than solid at #11.

croz24

06-03-2008, 01:51 AM

He is big, athletic, capable of defending, hard worker, coachable, teamplayer, etc. He is a fairly safe pick. Compared to the bigs like McGee, Jordan they have some serious question marks. There is really no safe big man to take in this draft aside from Michael Beasley.

I'm not someone who is obsessed with Westbrook by any means. But I do like him as a prospect. I also don't expect him to be a top player. I always like to think of him to be similar to Antonio Daniels.

If Pacers want a home run type of pick they better move up to get Eric Gordon or look at DJ Augistin (better chance of being a star than Westbrook IMO) or look at maybe Donte Greene or one of the big guys.

Westbrook, IMO, is a safe pick.

what do you mean by westbrook being big? westbrook is indeed a hard worker, coachable, and a team player, but even as a defender, i don't see him able to guard anything other than opposing teams' pgs. much too small to guard sgs imo. as prospects, i'd say rondo was a much better prospect and he fell to the 20s.

but yes, really any time you have a hard worker like westbrook they are ultimately safe picks and tend to improve through the years. this is the reason i like joe alexander so much. the pacers need the fire and intensity they've lacked since ron was here. if we do indeed draft westbrook, hopefully he can bring that. for that same reason, i don't like ej. ej just has never been disciplined off the court, almost never shows any sort of fire (typical of most indiana high schoolers), and just doesn't have that great of a work ethic.

i crave for that competitve spirit in players. guys who i've seen with the passion and work ethic you speak of imo are (in order): oj mayo, joe alexander, russell westbrook, derrick rose, anthony randolph, kevin love, jerryd bayless and then the drop off...

i'd say you are correct about the bigs. the bigs in this draft have potential, but there really is no safe pick there. the safest bigs would probably be jason thompson and joey dorsey ("safe" lol) based on where they're likely to be drafted and their potential roles on the teams who draft them.

Rajah Brown

06-03-2008, 06:59 AM

I'm pretty lukewarm on Westbrook. But I believe he's 6-3 or so and
'plays' at about 6-5 with his length. Wether he can develop the
necessary PG instincts/skills is anybody's guess and probably pretty
questionable. He hasn't played enough period, let alone at PG,
for anyone to have a clue. If he can't, his ability to defend PG's
will be of little to no use.

DisplacedKnick

06-03-2008, 07:14 AM

Augustin at #6? Really?

No, not really - but it's Chad Ford. Walsh has been around long enough to know how tough it is for a small PG to be a star. Augustin COULD be that guy but it's a long shot.

What I hope he's done is looked at players he might get at 6 and decided which players are worth taking with that and what situation means trading the pick. Personally, I'd be OK with Randolph or Mayo there but if we get lower on my list I'd say he could trade it for a later first.

And I still say we need to trade into a late first and nab Chalmers, even if we take Augustin/Westbrook at #11. In fact, especially if we take Westbrook, because he's more of a SG anyway.

I think the same holds true for Indy. If there isn't a PG worth taking at 11, trade down to 19-22 and take a SG. Most of the guys I have pegged to go from 12-20 - the best athletes - are SF's. Trade down and take CDR or someone else. Or take a shot at someone like Jordan but you better be patient.

D-BONE

06-03-2008, 08:00 AM

One more, Weaver pulls a Prince and runs down Westbrook. Weaver plays a little wing point and is a monster defender, and can be had in the late first or maybe even early 2nd. He's also got a really solid family situation and work ethic that puts him in line with Augustin somewhat. Wingspan is probably an issue, as is consistent offense, but he does give you a lot of what you want from Westbrook for a lot cheaper.

<OBJECT height=355 width=425>
&nbsp
<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/K9AXrLkTvNc&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" height="355" width="425"></OBJECT>
Yeah, I'd be absolutely delighted if we could somehow land Weaver. Just bring him off the bench as a situational defender to start. Maybe he develops a little more offensive game but that's gravy. Heavy cheese factor on the music in that clip.

Hicks

06-03-2008, 09:09 AM

I'm still lukewarm as well regarding Westbrook. Limited offense, size of a PG, but isn't a PG, yet plays good D. Not enough there on the surface to entice me. Seems like Rondo was more interesting as a rookie than he might be, unless he shows more.

rexnom

06-03-2008, 09:30 AM

Hmm...I would really like CDR, I think. I'd be happy if we walked away from this draft with him. I still don't get why he is so low. What's so funny is that even Ford seems fairly sure that he could start on a contending team, like the Hornets. I guess a solid starter is nothing special in the draft.

eldubious

06-03-2008, 11:37 AM

If the Pacers only took one player in the draft, I'd prefer it to be Westbrook. He has star potential because he is still learning the game. He will be what Antonio Daniels should have been.

Naptown_Seth

06-03-2008, 11:44 AM

The key with Weaver is that he has some offense, way more than Greene did. There's another clip out there where Weaver crosses over Mayo pretty badly.

Now you don't count on his offense or his shot, but at least you don't worry that he'll hand the ball over every 2 seconds like Greene did/does. He's a leaner PGish version of B Rush to me.

I realize we don't need more bench guys, but at some point you might want to fill the bench with guys you really would like to develop and have hopes for. If you've tried Owens and are passing then grab Weaver as the replacement rather than going FA.

Rexnom, I think the concern with CDR is his defense and maybe even his offensive game off the ball. Clearly he can score it in multiple ways and that's intriguing, but is it enough. I do like him but not quite as much as some other players.

Hicks

06-03-2008, 12:10 PM

I'm fine if we draft many "solid" players, but not stars*, if you can get a team of them. You get depth, and you might get lucky and one or two of them exceed your expectations.

*assuming we don't draft much higher than we are this year

Mourning

06-03-2008, 03:20 PM

I would still very much like us to move up a couple of spots if possible to get Gordon or if Lopez is really slipping this much then why not try to get just a few spots up and nap him?

purdue101

06-03-2008, 06:38 PM

if gordon is sitting around at 7, i wonder if LAC would do the 11th + ike for the 7th???

Coop

06-03-2008, 08:10 PM

Ike isn't going to get you anything. They would probably rather have Shawne.

esabyrn333

06-03-2008, 08:22 PM

Ike isn't going to get you anything. They would probably rather have Shawne.

I would do 11 and shawne for Gordon.

Young

06-03-2008, 10:01 PM

I would do 11 and shawne for Gordon.

Sorry if this has been reported before but both Gordon and DJ White refused to work out for the Pacers. Gordon expects to be gone by the time the Pacers pick at 11 and White expects to be gone before 41. I think it could be a sign they don't want to play for the Pacers or maybe they just never heard of a team trading up in the draft.

esabyrn333

06-03-2008, 10:11 PM

Sorry if this has been reported before but both Gordon and DJ White refused to work out for the Pacers. Gordon expects to be gone by the time the Pacers pick at 11 and White expects to be gone before 41. I think it could be a sign they don't want to play for the Pacers or maybe they just never heard of a team trading up in the draft.

I would hope it is the latter. I believe there is no greater honor in professional sports to get to lead your hometown team to a championship.

pwee31

06-03-2008, 11:25 PM

Realgm.com has updated their Mock Draft and they have Westbrook and Augustin being selected before we pick.

That would be interesting

Anthem

06-03-2008, 11:29 PM

Realgm.com has updated their Mock Draft and they have Westbrook and Augustin being selected before we pick.

That would be interesting
They're full of crap. Love at #15? No way. If he's on the board at #11, we take him no questions asked.

Jonathan

06-04-2008, 02:43 AM

Who is Chad Ford?
What are his credentials?
Why should we put any validation into his mock draft?

Will Galen

06-04-2008, 07:15 AM

Who is Chad Ford?
What are his credentials?
Why should we put any validation into his mock draft?

Chad Ford is a long time draft expert at ESPN, who routinely interviews and talks to scouts, GM's and team presidents during the season. His mock drafts are not who he thinks should go where but what he's hearing from his league sources.

He's said this past week that he thought a few people told him outright lies during the 0rlando pre-draft camp in who they are interested in, but still an overall pattern emerges.

I like him better than anyone else.

count55

06-04-2008, 08:16 AM

They're full of crap. Love at #15? No way. If he's on the board at #11, we take him no questions asked.

I would hope this would be true, particularly over Deandre Jordan.

Naptown_Seth

06-04-2008, 12:13 PM

I'm fine if we draft many "solid" players, but not stars*, if you can get a team of them. You get depth, and you might get lucky and one or two of them exceed your expectations.

*assuming we don't draft much higher than we are this year
I agree with this even further, in that this idea that THIS YEAR we must get a star is wrong. If you can, sure, but otherwise let things flow naturally if you want to make the most of things.

Simmons anti-LA rant (in jest) brings up yet again just how often the Lakers got superstars without being bad or earning the top picks. Often they traded into those stud picks. Imagine if the Pacers had gotten into a deal with Chicago for JO (taking Ben, Hughes and swapping picks). At the time it's iffy, but then they hit the lottery and you are drafting #1.

At some point a REASONABLE chance at a star is going to present itself if you play it smart and patient, or have the saavy to get over on teams in deals (as in DW did, but does Larry).

So many greats came out of deals, including draft day things (see Kobe).

When that chance comes you'd like to have as much in place and waiting on that star as you can.

They're full of crap. Love at #15? No way. If he's on the board at #11, we take him no questions asked.
I agree. Love measured well, looks leaner, and has done nothing to slow the ground swell for him. I think he's getting overhyped even. Just a few months ago I was looking at him to be a great pick around 17 when he was set to be there and the Pacers looked to be picking that low. Amazing to see the drastic change.

Jim R

06-04-2008, 01:12 PM

No small feat.

Nobody's worried about his defense at the 1 spot, or even his ability to score on opposing PGs. We need more than that from a point man, though. You don't learn to run a team by working out in a gym.

Not saying he can't (and I'd be glad to draft him) but it's not a sure thing.

That was your comment about developing PG instincts. Not that I disagree with the notion, but I'd be curious what your thoughts or anyone else's thoughts are on that subject.

I don't view Tinsley as having PG instincts. He's more of a two read PG, he either finds the assist or forces up a shot. Those aren't PG instincts. Those are stat instincts. I know you didn't bring up Tinsley, but he's the person whose job we're implicitly discussing.

Westbrook averaged 4.3 assists per game, leading UCLA, on a team which ran a pretty disciplined motion offense. That usually implies, outside of post feeds into Love, not set situation where assists come from. That implies to me a great understanding of when and where the pass must be delivered.

I don't worry about his instincts. I would worry about handling pressure at variable pick up points. That said, I'd be more than happy with Westbrook at #11.

Tinsley is an A-B type PG. In other words, he will make the play which leads to an assist, but he only stubbornly makes the play which leads to the pass which leads to the assist. In other words, he would suck at hockey. I'd take my chances on a strong defender, showing him the ropes, and molding him in a system which very much relies on running a great deal of offense through the wings.

The ball gets too bogged down in Tinsley's hands, and I rather doubt Westbrook would have problems making ball screen reads, which to me is about the only thing Tinsley does well.

Rajah Brown

06-04-2008, 01:30 PM

Jim (aka Bloom)-

I have nothing to add other than to say this. The more often you
post here at PD, the better.

Jim R

06-04-2008, 04:03 PM

Thanks. I actually follow the NBA more than college, but the Rivals buddies keep me hopping.

Roy Munson

06-04-2008, 04:45 PM

I agree. Love measured well, looks leaner, and has done nothing to slow the ground swell for him. I think he's getting overhyped even. Just a few months ago I was looking at him to be a great pick around 17 when he was set to be there and the Pacers looked to be picking that low. Amazing to see the drastic change.

What does "measured well" mean? He measured at 6-7 3/4. That's not what I would consider "measured well". A slow 6-7 3/4 post is not exactly what the Pacers need.

d_c

06-04-2008, 05:01 PM

What does "measured well" mean? He measured at 6-7 3/4. That's not what I would consider "measured well". A slow 6-7 3/4 post is not exactly what the Pacers need.

"Measured well" means he put on some thicker shoes and socks so he could get up to 6'9.5".

OakMoses

06-04-2008, 05:32 PM

I'm still lukewarm as well regarding Westbrook. Limited offense, size of a PG, but isn't a PG, yet plays good D. Not enough there on the surface to entice me. Seems like Rondo was more interesting as a rookie than he might be, unless he shows more.

Westbrook is a better on ball defender than Rondo. Rondo is a good defender, but I wouldn't call him a lockdown defender like Battier or Bowen. He gambles too much on steals. Westbrook is a lockdown defender, even at the NBA level. Westbrook is also a better shooter than Rondo was coming out of college. Rondo was/is a better ball-handler, but that's about it. Rondo is developing nicely, but his game had more holes than Westbrook's coming out of college.

BlueNGold

06-04-2008, 05:51 PM

Westbrook is a better on ball defender than Rondo. Rondo is a good defender, but I wouldn't call him a lockdown defender like Battier or Bowen. He gambles too much on steals. Westbrook is a lockdown defender, even at the NBA level. Westbrook is also a better shooter than Rondo was coming out of college. Rondo was/is a better ball-handler, but that's about it. Rondo is developing nicely, but his game had more holes than Westbrook's coming out of college.

I like the enthusiasm, but this is almost too much to take. There is no guarantee this guy even makes it in the NBA. Yes, he is athletic. But this "lockdown defender at the NBA level" talk is simply ridiculous. Let's see if the guy can make a starting line-up first.

The NBA is filled with athletic guys. Our good buddy Freddy Jones could defend well and could also jump out of the gym but I don't see him tearing it up in the NBA...certainly not at the PG position. Quis Daniels is taller, longer, defends well, probably drives to the bucket better and is roughly as athletic, but even he have never cracked a starting lineup. Westbrook has very little resume' even in college at PG.

The truth is, Westbrook is UNDERSIZED to play SG and will need to develop NBA level PG skills to have much value. The fact his ball handling and play making ability are suspect, there are already two strikes. This will not be like UCLA nor like a pickup game at the park...many have tried and few have succeeded.

Anthem

06-04-2008, 06:26 PM

What does "measured well" mean? He measured at 6-7 3/4. That's not what I would consider "measured well". A slow 6-7 3/4 post is not exactly what the Pacers need.
Hopefully the other GMs agree, and he falls out of the top 10.

BlueNGold

06-04-2008, 07:25 PM

Hopefully the other GMs agree, and he falls out of the top 10.

I agree. It will be interesting to see how Love's game translates, but I suspect strength is not going to be a problem. Players will need to shoot over him, which will happen. He will have problems guarding KG. But he also has a lot of savvy.

Imagine Ike with a basketball IQ. An undersized PF. Not much in terms of hops. Maybe Ike is a bit longer...but Love is a bit taller. The bball IQ is not comparable and will make a huge difference IMO...

Jim R

06-04-2008, 08:19 PM

What does "measured well" mean? He measured at 6-7 3/4. That's not what I would consider "measured well". A slow 6-7 3/4 post is not exactly what the Pacers need.

If most everyone in the league bumps themselves up an inch or two, it translates better when you know the people he's competing aren't as tall as they say either. You can bet Love will be listed at 6'9".

I heard from one of the guys doing the measuring Love actually measured out at 6'6" 7/8.

Jim R

06-04-2008, 08:25 PM

I agree. It will be interesting to see how Love's game translates, but I suspect strength is not going to be a problem. Players will need to shoot over him, which will happen. He will have problems guarding KG. But he also has a lot of savvy.

Imagine Ike with a basketball IQ. An undersized PF. Not much in terms of hops. Maybe Ike is a bit longer...but Love is a bit taller. The bball IQ is not comparable and will make a huge difference IMO...

The height that matters has NOTHING to do with floor to the top of the head. It truly matters in floor to reach, and Love's reach is 8'10". His no step vertical is 29". That's pretty damn good. His one step vertical is 35".

BlueNGold

06-04-2008, 09:54 PM

The height that matters has NOTHING to do with floor to the top of the head. It truly matters in floor to reach, and Love's reach is 8'10". His no step vertical is 29". That's pretty damn good. His one step vertical is 35".

Good point. That's not terrible lift and he's likely to get in better shape. I think he may surprise some people. Again, it will be interesting how his game translates. He is pretty slow, but I still bet he will be fine.

Rajah Brown

06-04-2008, 10:10 PM

BlueNGold-

Love ran the 3/4-court sprint in 3.22 secs. For comparsion,
Beasley ran it in 3.24 and Randolph in 3.26.

Anthem

06-04-2008, 10:39 PM

Love ran the 3/4-court sprint in 3.22 secs. For comparsion, Beasley ran it in 3.24 and Randolph in 3.26.
Joey Dorsey ran it in 3.20, Patrick Ewing ran it in 3.43, DeAndre Jordan ran it in 3.27, and Brook Lopez ran it in 3.57.

Heck, OJ Mayo was 3.14 seconds... not a big difference.

Basically, Love is going to be able to hang with almost all big men in terms of speed.

eldubious

06-04-2008, 10:40 PM

NBADraft.net has updated their mock draft and have the Pacers taking Joe Alexander at #11 and the Bucks taking Westbrook at #8. I wonder if there is a trade in the works, because neither one of those picks make much sense for the respective teams. I would be happy if the Pacers traded Shawne Williams and the #11 for Villlanueva and the #8.

Rajah Brown

06-04-2008, 10:43 PM

Anthem-

Exactly. I'm pretty impressed with Love's #'s in every respect. That
1-step, vert of 35" is damn good for a kid his size who's not known
as an explosive athlete.

BlueNGold

06-04-2008, 10:43 PM

BlueNGold-

Love ran the 3/4-court sprint in 3.22 secs. For comparsion,
Beasley ran it in 3.24 and Randolph in 3.26.

So...Love should be able to play SF then, right? ...or is the hang-up his quickness because he certainly has the standing reach and hops (as indicated in a previous post) to play the position.

....these types of comparisons are interesting, but often do not reflect reality. I have seen more than a couple instances where these numbers are not entirely believable. Without looking, I think Durant's numbers come to mind. I think a better estimate is by looking at these guys play in a competitive game situation....because I certainly do not expect Love to be as quick as Beasley....otherwise it would be Love going #1.

Edit: also, a sprint is one thing. Endurance and being able to keep that pace...along with change of direction and quickness are all totally different factors. I'm a Kevin Love proponent because of his bball IQ and I'm not saying he doesn't have the athleticism, but I do think it is an issue. Size in particular. Otherwise, someone with his bball IQ would be going #1.

Anthem

06-04-2008, 10:52 PM

So...Love should be able to play SF then, right? ...or is the hang-up his quickness because he certainly has the standing reach and hops (as indicated in a previous post) to play the position.

....these types of comparisons are interesting, but often do not reflect reality. I have seen more than a couple instances where these numbers are not entirely believable. Without looking, I think Durant's numbers come to mind. I think a better estimate is by looking at these guys play in a competitive game situation....because I certainly do not expect Love to be as quick as Beasley....otherwise it would be Love going #1.

Edit: also, a sprint is one thing. Endurance and being able to keep that pace...along with change of direction and quickness are all totally different factors. I'm a Kevin Love proponent because of his bball IQ and I'm not saying he doesn't have the athleticism, but I do think it is an issue. Size in particular. Otherwise, someone with his bball IQ would be going #1.
Nobody's saying he's "athletic." He's certainly not "explosive." But calling him "slow" is hard to defend.

BlueNGold

06-04-2008, 10:55 PM

Nobody's saying he's "athletic." He's certainly not "explosive." But calling him "slow" is hard to defend.

Slow...not explosive...I'm not sure how much that matters. This is not a track meet. The point is, can the guy move fast enough when it matters?

CableKC

06-04-2008, 11:16 PM

NBADraft.net has updated their mock draft and have the Pacers taking Joe Alexander at #11 and the Bucks taking Westbrook at #8. I wonder if there is a trade in the works, because neither one of those picks make much sense for the respective teams. I would be happy if the Pacers traded Shawne Williams and the #11 for Villlanueva and the #8.
Also.....keep in mind that the Bucks are looking to focus more on the defensive end....Westbrook maybe the type of player that the Bucks are looking for if Gordon is not available.

d_c

06-04-2008, 11:28 PM

NBADraft.net has updated their mock draft and have the Pacers taking Joe Alexander at #11 and the Bucks taking Westbrook at #8. I wonder if there is a trade in the works, because neither one of those picks make much sense for the respective teams. I would be happy if the Pacers traded Shawne Williams and the #11 for Villlanueva and the #8.

Why would the Bucks trade a better player and a higher pick for a lesser player and a lower pick? What's in it for them?

Anyhow, that's just NBADraft's own prediction. I don't think they're making that mock draft on the assumption of any insider information.

CableKC

06-04-2008, 11:36 PM

Why would the Bucks trade a better player and a higher pick for a lesser player and a lower pick? What's in it for them?

Anyhow, that's just NBADraft's own prediction. I don't think they're making that mock draft on the assumption of any insider information.
Although the Bucks are looking for a SF....I agree with you on this as well....at their draft spot....they can probably get Gallinari as their future SF instead of trading down.

Jim R

06-05-2008, 07:25 AM

A friend and I were looking at NBADraftNet's updated mock, and neither one of us felt Milwaukee would go PG. I've been a Sessions fan for awhile, and I really liked his play in the pre-draft camp last year as well as the summer league.

Anthem

06-05-2008, 12:12 PM

Slow...not explosive...I'm not sure how much that matters. This is not a track meet. The point is, can the guy move fast enough when it matters?
Exactly. And Love clearly can, and that's all anybody's going to worry about.

rexnom

06-05-2008, 05:09 PM

Love only helped himself at the combine. At this point, I'd be all for moving up to get him.

The Pacers have begun working out players at Conseco Fieldhouse this week and a variety of talent has been evaluated by team president Larry Bird and general manager David Morway.

On Wednesday the team worked out North Carolina's Ty Lawson, D.J. Augustin of Texas, Ohio State's Jamar Butler, Stanley Burrell of Xavier, Sasha Kaun of Kansas and Nebraska's Aleks Maric.

They hold the 11th pick in this month's draft.

The team will also workout UCLA's Russell Westbrook within the next few weeks, as well as DeAndre Jordan of Texas A&M.
Indiana also hasn't ruled out making a deal on the draft night.

"We're considering everything and one of the things that we have looked at is acquiring another pick later in the first round," Morway said in a phone interview.

"We are having ongoing conversations with teams everyday and while I don't know the likelihood of it now, we probably won't see anything happen until the night of the draft," he added.
Via Andrew Perna/RealGM (http://basketball.realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/52859/20080605/pacers_begin_preparing_their_workouts/#)

The Pacers have begun working out players at Conseco Fieldhouse this week and a variety of talent has been evaluated by team president Larry Bird and general manager David Morway.

On Wednesday the team worked out North Carolina's Ty Lawson, D.J. Augustin of Texas, Ohio State's Jamar Butler, Stanley Burrell of Xavier, Sasha Kaun of Kansas and Nebraska's Aleks Maric.

They hold the 11th pick in this month's draft.

The team will also workout UCLA's Russell Westbrook within the next few weeks, as well as DeAndre Jordan of Texas A&M.
Indiana also hasn't ruled out making a deal on the draft night.

"We're considering everything and one of the things that we have looked at is acquiring another pick later in the first round," Morway said in a phone interview.

"We are having ongoing conversations with teams everyday and while I don't know the likelihood of it now, we probably won't see anything happen until the night of the draft," he added.
Via Andrew Perna/RealGM (http://basketball.realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/52859/20080605/pacers_begin_preparing_their_workouts/#)

:pray:

YoSoyIndy

06-05-2008, 06:25 PM

Joey Dorsey ran it in 3.20, Patrick Ewing ran it in 3.43, DeAndre Jordan ran it in 3.27, and Brook Lopez ran it in 3.57.

Heck, OJ Mayo was 3.14 seconds... not a big difference.

Basically, Love is going to be able to hang with almost all big men in terms of speed.

That's amazing. No way anyone would have guessed Love has so much speed. I guess the question about him is stamina.

d_c

06-05-2008, 06:38 PM

That's amazing. No way anyone would have guessed Love has so much speed. I guess the question about him is stamina.

A few years ago, nobody would've guessed that Luke Jackson would have graded out to be more athletic than Andre Igoudala, but that's exactly what happened.

"Workout athleticism" and "basketball athleticism" are often two different things.

Jason Smith pretty much dusting Brandan Wright and Kevin Durant in all of the combine drills is another example. And who had last year's best lane agility score from last season? Yes, the great Sun Yue.

Young

06-05-2008, 06:47 PM

"Workout athleticism" and "basketball athleticism" are often two different things.

Jason Smith pretty much dusting Brandan Wright and Kevin Durant in all of the combine drills is another example. And who had last year's best lane agility score from last season? Yes, the great Sun Yue.

Yeah I hate the whole offical workout scores thing. Offical height and all that crap. Who really cares? In the end if someone can play or can't play is all that really matters.

I just hope that GMs around the league don't actually put a whole bunch of thought into into these things. I mean do you think Derrick Rose being 6'2 instead of 6'4 is going to drop him in this draft below number 2? I don't think so.

count55

06-06-2008, 08:48 AM

Didn't know if this was discussed elsewhere or needed another thread, but...

This is a couple days old, and I'm hoping they update this, but NBA.com put together a consolidated look (http://www.nba.com/draft2008/board/mock.html) at the "best" mock drafts. This is how they did it:

To calculate the consensus, we awarded 14 points for the first overall pick, 13 to the second, continuing to 1 for the final lottery pick. The player with the highest point total represents the top overall selection.

The "consensus" pick for the Pacers was Russell Westbrook, based on this calculation from 11 different mocks. It's far from scientific, but it's an interesting look.

BTW...this only does the 14 lottery picks.

Naptown_Seth

06-06-2008, 09:40 AM

Hoopsworld with no Westbrook in the top 14 AND DJ Augustin at 7? Eric Gordan falls to 11?

A mockery of a mock :D

EVERYONE in the NBA sees 'brook as an NBA caliber athlete. Maybe need factors in at some point, but not to a Danny Granger goes to 17 level. There is no major question mark on Westbrook other than "how can my team use him". No injury, no work ethic, no off court issues.

And I'm not even really a big Westbrook fan, certainly not as the Pacers PG solution (like him for SG though despite no outside shot).

count55

06-06-2008, 09:48 AM

Hoopsworld with no Westbrook in the top 14 AND DJ Augustin at 7? Eric Gordan falls to 11?

A mockery of a mock :D

EVERYONE in the NBA sees 'brook as an NBA caliber athlete. Maybe need factors in at some point, but not to a Danny Granger goes to 17 level. There is no major question mark on Westbrook other than "how can my team use him". No injury, no work ethic, no off court issues.

And I'm not even really a big Westbrook fan, certainly not as the Pacers PG solution (like him for SG though despite no outside shot).

Yeah, I didn't look at the specific mocks, I just thought it'd be nice to see a bunch together.

I would agree that it would probably take some pretty horrific workouts for Westbrook to drop out of the lottery or past us. (And by horrific, I mean they'd have to include the entrance of male prostitutes and a bearded lady with whipped cream and jumper cables.)

quiller

06-07-2008, 03:01 AM

I would have no problem with either Westbrook or Love as a Pacer but then I am a big time UCLA Bruin fan...

Westbrook is not even close to strong enough to play much 2 guard unless you have a real large pg. Westbrook has good to better then average ball handling skills, does not have the creative passing instincts of a premier pg but is quick enough to do ok running the point. He has a streaking outside shot with reasonable range. Much better scorer in the 18-14 foot range and is quick enough to get open with good lift on the jumper. Can score inside fairly well on drives against the big. His defense is better then average(uses his quickness to good advantage does not gamble) but not to the level of a Bowen but could be that good if he gets good coaching as is he still would stop penetration on all but the elite pg's in the NBA. Offensively he is more of a pure scorer type then a pure shooter. Mostly he finds ways of putting the ball in the basket rather then a catch and shoot guy. Very quick with the ball he will be able to penetrate against most anyone. Weakness because he is not a pure shooter he can go cold from deep and is not great ft shooter, project to around mid 70's in the NBA. He also is not a pure PG and sometimes has trouble with ball control on penetration but he has shown marked improvement at UCLA in running the point. Could work well on the pacers with Dun's as a two.

Love is a PF/Center in the NBA.... most all of Love's strengths have been mentioned in this thread. Yet I will highlight what I think will work for him in the NBA... a solid smart effective rebounder both offensively and defensively even against more athletic bigs (again due to coaching does not gamble and plays good position and technique). Very good passer, good instincts on the offensive end, and yes he is a good outlet passer, no one in the NBA is better, I can remember only one bad outlet pass all year and that was in the final 4 against Memphis. Can score inside is creative with a wide range of shots including a little jump hook he showed from time to time. A very very good shooter with range, the NBA three might be out of his range as a rookie but if he makes it by year two or three he will be able make it at a 40% rate. As is he will be deadly up to 20 feet if left open. Good ft shooter for a big, high 70's to 80's. A smart and very driven player, wants to win and will play hard for 60 minutes. Main weakness is by default his size, he can have trouble scoring put backs as he does not have the explosiveness to Slam it, a little more strength conditioning might help here. He would struggle against players like Howard, and Wallace. Camby would be able to shut him down. Would work well on the pacers even if we still have JO. He can slide to high post to JO's low post. He also works good on the pick and roll, with a quick catch and shoot shot.

The Pacers have begun working out players at Conseco Fieldhouse this week and a variety of talent has been evaluated by team president Larry Bird and general manager David Morway.

"We're considering everything and one of the things that we have looked at is acquiring another pick later in the first round," Morway said in a phone interview.
YES!!! I think I'm actually liking Morway...

Hicks

06-08-2008, 11:07 AM

YES!!! I think I'm actually liking Morway...

.....but what happens if/when we end up not trading for another pick?

Doddage

06-08-2008, 02:09 PM

Then that would obviously be a letdown. Either way though, it's good to be hearing things like that as it gives me some hope.

Shade

06-08-2008, 02:12 PM

YES!!! I think I'm actually liking Morway...

Agreed. I hope he's able to make it happen. :pray:

Shade

06-08-2008, 02:13 PM

Hoopsworld with no Westbrook in the top 14 AND DJ Augustin at 7? Eric Gordan falls to 11?

A mockery of a mock :D

EVERYONE in the NBA sees 'brook as an NBA caliber athlete. Maybe need factors in at some point, but not to a Danny Granger goes to 17 level. There is no major question mark on Westbrook other than "how can my team use him". No injury, no work ethic, no off court issues.

And I'm not even really a big Westbrook fan, certainly not as the Pacers PG solution (like him for SG though despite no outside shot).

This is to everyone:

Assume Gordon and Westbrook are both available to us at #11. Who do you take?

Doddage

06-08-2008, 02:21 PM

Probably EJ. Although then I'd like to see us make a move for a tall PG that would compensate for EJ's lack of height on the defensive end. Perhaps making a risky investment in Shaun Livingston?

mrknowname

06-08-2008, 02:22 PM

This is to everyone:

Assume Gordon and Westbrook are both available to us at #11. Who do you take?

gordon

Kegboy

06-08-2008, 02:29 PM

Gordon.

Though, it'd be interesting to see what a Reggie/Alford situation would have been like if Alford was the real deal.

croz24

06-08-2008, 02:39 PM

Probably EJ. Although then I'd like to see us make a move for a tall PG that would compensate for EJ's lack of height on the defensive end. Perhaps making a risky investment in Shaun Livingston?

probably ej? westbrook is a nobody and will be a nobody in the nba. the only time in his life he was ever close to being a somebody, was when he was the #4 option on a ucla team this past year loaded from top to bottom in talent.

pwee31

06-08-2008, 07:10 PM

This is to everyone:

Assume Gordon and Westbrook are both available to us at #11. Who do you take?

Gordon, without thinking twice.

Naptown_Seth

06-08-2008, 09:02 PM

This is to everyone:

Assume Gordon and Westbrook are both available to us at #11. Who do you take?
EJ. Why? His outside shot.

Westbrook is the defender and slightly better ball handler. He also seems much better about getting involved in plays not called for him.

But EJ has size and a much more NBA caliber shooting touch. I think he is closer to a true SG solution than Westbrook is. I actually think it would be bad for him to play in Indy however.

BlueNGold

06-08-2008, 09:08 PM

Gordon because he is more explosive offensively than Westbrook is good defensively. Gordon will stick in the league without a doubt because he can put the ball in the basket and can get his own shot. He will either start or perform as an off the bench scorer ala Ben Gordon.

Since86

06-08-2008, 09:13 PM

The height that matters has NOTHING to do with floor to the top of the head. It truly matters in floor to reach, and Love's reach is 8'10". His no step vertical is 29". That's pretty damn good. His one step vertical is 35".

His one step vert was 35 or was it his max vert?

Verticals are tested with one step. Hardly ever is it a no step. DWade's one step vertical was 35, there's no way that Love is in that category.

Joey Dorsey ran it in 3.20, Patrick Ewing ran it in 3.43, DeAndre Jordan ran it in 3.27, and Brook Lopez ran it in 3.57.

Heck, OJ Mayo was 3.14 seconds... not a big difference.

Basically, Love is going to be able to hang with almost all big men in terms of speed.

You would be very surprised how big of a difference 0.1 secs difference in sprinting is.

BlueNGold

06-08-2008, 09:22 PM

His one step vert was 35 or was it his max vert?

Verticals are tested with one step. Hardly ever is it a no step. DWade's one step vertical was 35, there's no way that Love is in that category.

You would be very surprised how big of a difference 0.1 secs difference in sprinting is.

The verticals are relevant and something to consider. That and standing reach and wingspan are all important physical characteristics.

The sprint times are entirely overrated IMO. They are not nearly as important as quickness and the ability to change direction in the context of a game...whether on D or O. That's why lateral quickness can be such a big issue. Now, there are instances where a PF runs 75 feet to convert or stop a fast break.....but it's simply not that important.

IOW, I would take that slow guy Pat Ewing over some of the other faster bigs including Mr. Love...who I would like to see in a Pacer uni nonetheless...

Naptown_Seth

06-08-2008, 09:40 PM

How fast does Love throw the ball to the other FT line? I'm betting it's faster than any of the guys guarding him can run. Did they measure that?

count55

06-08-2008, 09:46 PM

His one step vert was 35 or was it his max vert?

Verticals are tested with one step. Hardly ever is it a no step. DWade's one step vertical was 35, there's no way that Love is in that category.

In draft express's database http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-pre-draft-measurements/?page=&year=2003&draft=0&pos=0&sort= both Love's 35 and Wade's 35 were listed under "max vertical". Love had a 29 in "no step vertical", but there was no measurement in this category for Wade.

I could not tell you definitively if the measurements were obtained differently for the "max vertical" in the two years, but, absent any other information, this makes it look like Love matches Wade in this category.

Since86

06-08-2008, 09:58 PM

There's no way those numbers are correct, or they're categorized wrong. Either one, take your pick.

USAToday has an article on Wade that has his vert at 39inches.
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/basketball/nba/heat/2005-02-17-wade-all-star_x.htm

When we're talking about him having a one step 35" vert, with a standing reach of 8'10", that means he can touch 11'9" in a step. He wouldn't be the player that he is if he was that athletic. Everything he does makes up for what he lacks.

He boxes out as well as anyone, his offensive footwork is very good, and so forth.

They're really trying to say that Love has measured out with the likes of Josh Howard and Dwayne Wade? Come on.....

Anthem

06-08-2008, 10:12 PM

This is to everyone:

Assume Gordon and Westbrook are both available to us at #11. Who do you take?
EJ easy. But I'm with whoever said that it's probably better for him not to be the hometown kid.

croz24

06-09-2008, 12:49 AM

EJ easy. But I'm with whoever said that it's probably better for him not to be the hometown kid.

i agree...just don't see ej mentally handling the load that comes with such a position...ej's biggest problem at iu was trying to do TOO MUCH because he was the "home state kid" and the "iu savior". i strongly feel he'd encounter the same problems with the pacers...

Doddage

06-09-2008, 08:32 AM

probably ej? westbrook is a nobody and will be a nobody in the nba. the only time in his life he was ever close to being a somebody, was when he was the #4 option on a ucla team this past year loaded from top to bottom in talent.
And you do realize that Westbrook owns EJ defensively, right? So yes, probably EJ.

croz24

06-09-2008, 03:01 PM

And you do realize that Westbrook owns EJ defensively, right? So yes, probably EJ.

westbrook's defense would only be valuable on opposing pgs or combo guards. there's no way he'd be able to guard a legit sg in the nba with his size. even then, when ej put his mind to it, he was a lockdown defender at iu. while westbrook may be the slightly better defender, ej is superior in every other aspect of the game. westbrook is and always will be a nobody to basketball.